Mind and body age mismatch

Just heard from wife some days ago that son's classmate is a boy who was abandoned by both his father and mother. We know of another boy in our neighborhood whose young parents were separated less than a year after married and he is raised by his paternal grandparents.

We are not social workers. I believe social workers have more to tell.

Physical body grows according to natural laws, while [spiritual] mind grows from life experiences and guidance from parents and elders. There is too much academic education for the brain, yet virtually no proper education for the mind.

The if-then logic

人不为己，天诛地灭。

This Chinese idiom sounds wrong, but if so, then it wouldn't be one.

Logically speaking, it is correct, or true.

However, in most cases, we prefer the then to be false. For e.g., if you don't study, you will fail the exam. Thus, that makes not studying a bad choice.

On the other hand, consider this: if we don't punish children, they will not learn. Here, is punishing good or bad? Many would think obviously it is good. Actually, this depends ... on what they will be learning?

Thus, whether 人不为己 is good or bad depends on if 天诛地灭 is good or bad, or if the current "天" and "地" are good or bad. If these are bad, then 天诛地灭 would be good, and therefore 人不为己 would be good.

I think, instead of sustaining a world where 人不为己 is bad, isn't destroying, or actually transforming such kind of world into one whereby everyone is 人不为己, better?

Being selfish seems more acceptable

After the report of 1 HIV positive in 350 who don't know their HIV status came up, there were some ideas being raised.
One group called for compulsory HIV test. Some say this is tricky as individual rights might be harmed. Then, some suggested selective categories of people go for compulsory HIV test. Some say this is discrimination. Another technically very similar idea is being seriously considered, all patients at hospitals go for opt-out HIV test. Yet, this idea receive little objections.
I think this idea is put in a very smart way. First, although it is targeted at all patients, it is not compulsory. Second, although it is for certain category of people, it is not discriminating. Third, the main reason brought forward seems not to "catch" HIV positive people and to help them get treated, which may upset some who don't want to know, or don't want to get treated. Forth, the main reason seems to say, it is for a selfish kia-si purpose to have better protection for all the health care workers, with an expected appreciation by the public because of the SARs encounter just a few years back.
I guess, by suggesting that it is the rights of health care workers to have better level of protection, it is reasonable to request HIV test be done on all patients. Nowadays, when homosexuals talk about their rights to choose and others don't have right to tell them what to do, the majority one man one woman husband/wife family oriented people have to learn to be more "selfish" and argue about their rights being invaded by homosexuals asking to be treated as normal people.

Does it sound like blackmailing?

The suggestion that to encourage people who are potentially HIV positive to go for HIV test is to promise free medical treatment.

"If no free medical treatment promised if tested positive, then people would choose not to test for HIV."

It sounds like a threat or blackmail to the nation, the government, and the general public.

High-risk behaviour

What a nice term! What do we think of people with high-risk behaviour?
Are these people brave? E.g. some performers put themselves in danger by getting close to dangerous animals such as snakes, crocodiles, scorpions, etc.
Are these people skillful? E.g. stuntman and sports man in sports such as diving and gymnastic who risk injuries to carry out actions of high difficulties for movie filming and other entertaining or fund raising purposes.
Are these people sacrificing? E.g. soldiers who volunteer themselves to fight in the front lines to protect their love ones and homeland.
Sigh, the term usually does not refer to the above. It is use to describe people who have multiple sex partners, and therefore risking themselves and their partners to infection of STDs, HIV and the likes. "High-risk" is too neutral a term to be used. Should use terms such as irresponsible, selfish, lustful, inconsiderate, thoughtless, uncaring, careless, reckless, foolish, negligent, etc.!

What's the point?

Waiting away from the door before the train arrives serve no purpose if the acts of boarding the train starts once the door opens or before the last alighting person steps out!

Is painting those yellow markings just to show that something is done about the problem, or an act in a process to resolve the problem? I doubt the latter as there seems to be no evaluation and assessment of the problem status and implementation of further improvements.

A simple suggestion. Don't paint the same pattern at every door. When the escalator/stairs/exit is on one side, discourage passengers to stand at that side to block the alighting passengers.

Being religious

Religious teachings are generally considered good, or support the concept of serving others.
However, I observed most religious people seem to place self-interests on-top, or behind those of others. When faced with the challenge of risking one's spiritual and/or physical life for the betterment of others, only the true religious people overcome at ease and naturally.

Consider the famous story of two monks helping a lady across a river. The younger monk might have worried that he risk his spiritual health by touching the lady.

Consider shutting communication channels between "believers" and those whom the believers' higher authority labeled as evil. The "believers" prefer not to risk their chance of getting into Heaven, by not willing to have contacts with those whom they consider are not getting into Heaven.

Yet we see in movies, and some times also in real life, some heroic acts of taking high risk to save others.
Yet Jesus were among those whom the authority had considered not holy.
Yet a famous buddhist quote says "Should I not go to hell [to help], who shall [I ask to] go?"